Andrew, in most states it is illegal to release wildlife except in
conjunction with a management or research activity approved by the
proper authorities. This would include native fish, whether to the
habitat from which they were caught or otherwise. I concur with this
for several conservation reasons. First, if exceptions were made for
fish released into the habitat from which they were collected, how
would enforcement authorities be able to enforce, since the perpetrator
could always claim the fish came from that habitat? Second, even if
the native fish had never been exposed to others, they still might have
parasites or diseases, nonindigenous to their native habitat, that they
contracted in captivity. Third, some persons might keep native fish
species and not keep track of which ones came from where, or get them
mixed up with others unintentionally.

Best is to follow the law, and in the absence of law, follow the rule --
don't release fish except as part of an approved management or
research objective.

> I am writing a basic article about native fish and have a question > about > releasing fish. Some say that you should never release a native > fish kept in > captivity, even to its native waters. Others say that you > shouldn't release them > only if they were kept with fish from different locations. What is > your view on > this?> > Thanks,> Andrew>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------
/ This is the discussion list of the North American Native Fishes
/ Association (NANFA). Comments made on this list do not necessarily
/ reflect the beliefs or goals of NANFA. For more information about NANFA,
/ visit http://www.nanfa.org Please make sure all posts to nanfa-l are
/ consistent with the guidelines as per
/ http://www.nanfa.org/guidelines.shtml To subscribe, unsubscribe, or get
/ help, visit the NANFA email list home page and archive at
/ http://www.nanfa.org/email.shtml